This document summarizes the development of a self-driving delivery robot using rapid response manufacturing techniques. The robot is designed to deliver packages over short distances of up to 3 miles. Traditional manufacturing methods are slow, taking over a year to develop and release new products. The document proposes using concurrent engineering, design for manufacturing and assembly, rapid prototyping, and other rapid response manufacturing techniques. This allows critical components to be identified and manufactured quickly through techniques like metal injection molding. The new design and manufacturing approach is estimated to reduce the product development time by 80% and break even point by delivering packages, lowering costs and allowing the product to reach the market faster than competitors.

1. SELF
DRIVING
DELIVERY
ROBOT
RAPID
RESPONSE
MANUFACTURING

2. What does
the robot
do?
I am here
to deliver

3. Why not other technologies?

4. Semi-
Autonomous
control
9 Cameras
With Obstacle
Avoidance
GPS Enabled
Navigation with
Live Tracking
18 Kg
Design of the Product
6 Wheeled with
4 motorised
Auto Lock Basket
With App control
security
Speakers for
real time
conversation
to people
Distance Coverage
of 3 Miles

5. Origin of the product
In to the
Streets of
London
And
Ahead to
New York

6. Is the robot
safe?
For Humans:
They Run at
pedestrian’s speed
They weigh no more
than 40 Pounds
Emission Free
For the Robot:
Cargo Bay is Locked throughout the
journey
The package can be unlocked only
by recipient using Mobile App
Live Monitoring of Robots Position
to avoid theft

7. Need for this
Self Driving
Delivery
Robot to
reach market
faster?
Cost effective method to
deliver packages to suburban
homes
Reduced time to deliver
Packages
Competition between
Technological firms
for developing efficient way of
delivering packages
Technology satisfaction for the
consumers to get their
packages delivered by a self
driving robot

8. ECONOMICS OF THE PRODUCT
Delivery Cost Per Mile Per Package
Delivery robot’s economics
80%
Labour
Payback period / Break Even
Period:
49536 Delivery’s,
if the product is developed by
traditional Methods
Assumed Profit Per Delivery: 1.43 US$

9. Target Objectives
 To apply Rapid Response
Manufacturing Techniques
to the Product
 To develop these robots in
shorter Lead time
 To capture the Market
before the competitors

10. TRADITIONAL PRODUCT REALIZATION
DESIGN COST ESTIMATION MANUFACTURING
ASSEMBLYFACTORY ENDDELIVERY TO MARKET
Conceptual design – Need for the product?
Product design – CAD, Material selection, Robot
specification
Design Validation – CAE, FEA, Prototyping
Process Design – Plastic Injection Moulding, Metal
casting, Gear Hobbing, Forming
Tool Design – Tool Material, Design Dies, Design for
fixtures
Product cost estimation
Product price fixation
Manufacturing Tools and components:
Tool change
Machine Run time
Manufacturing Lead time
Sequence of operation
Scheduling
Assembly time using fasteners
Assembly Layout design
Testing of Products
Packaging the products
Concept and Market analysis
Service and Maintenence
PROCURED PARTS

11. BOTTLENECKS IN TRADITIONAL MANUFACTURING
SUPPLIER
 Lack of Standardised Parts
 Complexity of the design
 Delay in sourcing of raw
materials
DESIGN AND VALIDATION
 Prototyping complexity
 Longer time to Redesign and validate
 No Knowledge on Manufacturing,
Testing and assembling Complexity
 Limited Design standardisation of the
Parts
ASSEMBLY
 Longer assembly time
 Lack of high speed fasteners
 Complexity to assemble the parts
by the operators
 More Sub-Assemblies
MANUFACTURING
 Frequent changes in tool design for injection
moulding
 Supressed Quality in Mass Manufacturing
 Conventional Shop floor planning
 Lack of Proper Inventory Planning
 Process Sequencing according to Part
complexity
 Complexity of die making for Metal Casting
process
 Time for setting up of Machine tools and test
run
INFORMATION MISCOMMUNICATION

12. SCOPE OF THE PROJECT
 Reduced Lead time in design phase of the product and hence
reduced Product Lifecycle time to reach the market.
 Improved Knowledge transfer between various departments of
Product Cycle.
 Enhanced functionality and manufacturability in shorter time
with minimum cost.
 Top-Notch manufacturing freedom and flexibility.
 Expectations of the customers are well met.
 Reduction in Machine tooling and downtime.
 Better understanding and progress with the Suppliers.
 Modular assembly of components.
 Shorter production lines.

13. PROJECT METHODOLOGY –CRITICAL COMPONENTS
HIGH PRIORITY
MECHANICAL PARTS
12
High priority
Manufactured
Components
8
Critical
Components

14. Overview of Critical Components in Traditional Design
TRADITIONAL DESIGN

15. Proposed RRM techniques to product Manufacturing
 Making High Volume to Low weight
ratio of the Parts
 High speed fasteners
 Modular design for assemblies
 Optimum use of soft tooling for
fabricating the parts
 Additive Manufacturing techniques
applied to make dies for casting
 Inventory Planning for critical needs
 Sequencing the Process flow for rapid
Manufacturing
 Easiness to product usage and
handling
 Better Understanding the
functionality of the product
 Design for adaptability to
environment by Material
Combination
 Collaborative design of the
product using concurrent
engineering
 Efficient Knowledge transfer
between various departments

16. OUR ACHIEVEMENTS
AND RESEARCH

17. CONCURRENTENGINEERING
Identify
Needs
Conceptual
Design
CAD /
CAM
Sketching
CAE,
R&D
Design and
Validation
Team
FINAL
DESIGN
Quality
Team
Driver/
Controller
Finance
Team
Manufacturing
Team
Assembly
Team
Supplier
Efficient
KnowledgeTransfer
Outcomes:
 Enhanced Quality
 Increased Productivity
 Shorter time to market
 Lower development costs

18. DESIGN FOR MANUFACTURING AND ASSEMBLY
Target Objectives:
 Minimize number of parts
 Modular design
 Rapid Manufacturing process
 Minimize the use of fasteners
 Minimize Assembly directions
Integrating Product Design
and Process Design
Material Selection
Material Cost
Manufacturing Process
Manufacturing cost
Manufacturing time
Manufacturability
Product Quality
Usage of Raw Materials
What’s HOT?
Metal
Injection
Moulding
(MIM)

19. DFMA for Motor Assembly
Chassis – Machining- Cutting, Drilling
Motor Supports – Machining – Cutting, Drilling
Clamp, Clamp Closure – Injection Moulding
Materials – Aluminium alloy, ABS PC, Plain Carbon steel
Total Manufacturing, Material cost: 93 US$
Time to Manufacture: 78 minutes approx.
No. of components – 7
Assembly time – 188.6 seconds
Chassis – Casting
Motor Closure – Casting
Materials – Aluminium alloy, ABS PC
Total Manufacturing, Material cost: 52 US$
Time to Manufacture : 7 minutes approx.
No. of components – 4
Assembly time – 114.6 seconds
MIMMachining

20. PROPOSED NEW DESIGN
3D ANNOTATION

21. RAPID PROTOTYPING
VIRTUAL PROTOTYPING

22. RAPID PROTOTYPING
VIRTUAL PROTOTYPING

23. RAPID PROTOTYPING
Outcomes:
 Realize the product
 Save time and cost to make
design changes
 Customize the design
 Minimize design flaws
 Introduce changes instantly
PHYSICAL
PROTOTYPING
PHYSICAL PROTOTYPING

24. DESIGN FOR USER-FRIENDLINESS
WIRELESS CHARGING
REDUCED WEIGHT FOR
HANDLING EMERGENCY
BREAKDOWN
EASY DISMANTLING
DAMPED BASKET FOR
CRITICAL PACKAGES

25. TIME FRAME COMPARISON
80% reduction in Lead time
based on assumptions

26. COST ANALYSIS

27. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
NUMBER OF DELIVERIES

28. Conclusion and Recommendation

29. I am
here
to
deliver

30. A piece of Art by
Naresh Kumar Thanigaivel
Udayappan Praveen Kannan